[Dev] request for shell/git access

Andreas Grapentin andreas at grapentin.org
Sun Sep 3 15:34:50 GMT 2017


> i would like to continue working on a new graphical ISO and installer
> for parabola - oaken-source was working with me on this to some degree a
> few months ago but he has not been active in parabola since then and i
> have not been able to get anyone else to review them - the most
> attention it got was to suggest that perhaps parabola should stay true
> to its archlinux heritage and not have any graphical tools

Thanks for taking this over! I'm sorry for vanishing so abrubtly, but
that is probably a subject for another mail. Suffice to say that I'm
glad you continued working on this, and that I am basically back and
trying to catch up on things :)

My take on graphical tools or not is that there is no harm in having a
gui based installer and a traditional cli live-cd for installing.

> aurelien suggested i should ask for server access and finish the job
> myself adhocratically - lukashu then suggested i send a patch to the
> mailing list but that is not very practical as that patch would include
> over 100 files - (the calamares installer being not in parabola yet is
> thousands of files) - parabolaiso is stored in git and so are my changes
> so that is clearly the best way for anyone to acquire the sources and
> view the diffs - there is an earlier message posted to the mailing list
> describing the need for a new ISO, the current progress, and the future
> plans with links to the git repos on notabug -->
> https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2017-July/005685.html

Yes, your changes should definitely find their way into the git
repository. Providing you with push access to the repos seems like the
obvious choice, given the amount of work you already did.

> i am fine with completing it on my own but of course some peer review is
> a good idea - i will leave this to the team to decide how or whether to
> move forward on this - initially i am suggesting an alpha release to
> appear on the downloads page (that is ready now) - perhaps that would
> make it more likely to get more eyes on it if a demo were pre-built and
> ready

I would suggest distributing alpha-isos to a handful of hackers for
test installations in vms and maybe some physical servers, and then just
releasing them. We could consider adding a small note that links to the
last release, but I would give prominence to the new isos.

> im not sure how the servers are configured - i seem to remember
> oaken-source needed to touch multiple servers to post a new release (FTP
> site, the downloads wiki page) so it is not clear which specific access
> i should be asking for - but ideally, i would like to be able to build
> the ISOs on the server where they would be hosted rather than building
> locally and uploading - also there are many open issues on the bug
> tracker related to this (some are years old) so perhaps i could be
> permitted me to curate those

The meat of releasing a new iso lies in editing this page:

I uploaded the respective files via scp to the repo server, so you need
regular hacker access, the same as if you were to release packages.

I agree that you should get access to the issue tracker. Come to think
of it, you should also probably be added to the hackers list, to make
you the official maintainer of the isos.


> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev


my GPG Public Key:                 https://files.grapentin.org/.gpg/public.key
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20170903/205dc2df/attachment.sig>

More information about the Dev mailing list